Wednesday, February 13, 2008

Recipe For An Obama Supporter

While doing the monkey bar swing from one blog to another, I came across one woman's who is a raving Obama lover, having volunteered to canvas in primary states for this naive and radical empty suit, unable to recognize the cognitive dissonance between her statements that anyone voting for Hillary! or Huckabee can't be voting on the issues and her support for a guy whose volunteers are trained to not discuss issues.

As if there was any doubt that this poor girl is an idiot, she has posted the recipe on "how to make a Chrisi":

mix two parts Liberal with one part Socialist. add one venti chai latte. stir.
Nice. She doesn't cop to the fact that there is no functional difference between being a liberal and socialist - not to mention the fascist underpinnings of both - but she tosses in her beverage of choice: a five-dollar (or whatever they cost) Starbucks drink.

Nothing says typical dedicated supporter of Barack Hussein Obama than some clueless twit drinking a coffee that costs more than a pack of smokes (which I'd wager she'd like banned by the government) and believing that they're fighting for freedom instead of slavery.


UPDATE: I see on Power Line this morning that there is a minor kerfuffle about Obama's volunteer campaign office in Houston, which prominently displays a Cuban flag bearing an image of Che Guevara:

Obama said the Cuban flag with Che on it was "inappropriate," a criticism slightly more muted than the one he leveled against politicians who wear the American flag on their lapels ("hypocrites"). The Obama campaign emphasizes that this was a volunteer, unofficial office, and that Obama didn't endorse using the image of a mass-murdering terrorist (my words, of course, not theirs) in his campaign.

The incident is significant, however, in that it reveals what sort of change at least some of Obama's supporters think he has in mind. Are they wrong? Maybe, but what has Obama said or done to disabuse them of the idea that he is a Che-admiring leftist?

Then again, maybe these far-left Obama supporters are "confused" because they've been following his votes in the Senate. Obama was one of only 29 Senators who voted to filibuster the provision of the FISA reform bill that extended immunity to telecommunications companies that cooperate with law enforcement and intelligence authorities in identifying international terrorist communications. As Jennifer Rubin points out, this put Obama to the left of liberal stalwarts like Barbara Mikulski. This vote was significant because, just as terrorist supporters try to intimidate citizens by suing "John Does" who report suspicious activities, the terrorists' allies, absent immunity, would have tried to disable intelligence programs by harassing telecom companies with lawsuits.

So, while I assume that Obama's "change" doesn't involve actually emulating mass-murdering terrorists like Che Guevara, it's reasonable to infer that it won't involve doing much to catch them, either.
The identity politics pimps will try to marginalize opponents of Hillary! and Obama by hurling the smears of "RACIST!" and "SEXIST!" as if gender and color bias were the only reasons anyone could oppose these anointed liberal fascists. WRONG!!! If John Edwards was the candidate and held such ultra-radical views - he did spew the usual socialism, but not to this extreme - then sane, freedom-loving people would be rising against him.

I wonder how many ignorant voters think that Obama would be just like President David Palmer from "24". Alas, Palmer was a work of FICTION - there is no such thing has an honorable Democrat who is willing to use force to protect America these days.

No comments: